Posted on 05/31/2002 3:15:28 PM PDT by Bush2000
A conservative U.S. think tank suggests in an upcoming report that open-source software is inherently less secure than proprietary software, and warns governments against relying on it for national security.
The white paper, Opening the Open Source Debate, from the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (ADTI) will suggest that open source opens the gates to hackers and terrorists.
"Terrorists trying to hack or disrupt U.S. computer networks might find it easier if the federal government attempts to switch to 'open source' as some groups propose," ADTI said in a statement released ahead of the report.
Open-source software is freely available for distribution and modification, as long as the modified software is itself available under open-source terms. The Linux operating system is the best-known example of open source, having become popular in the Web server market because of its stability and low cost.
Many researchers have also suggested that since a large community contributes to and scrutinizes open-source code, security holes are less likely to occur than in proprietary software, and can be caught and fixed more quickly.
The ADTI white paper, to be released next week, will take the opposite line, outlining "how open source might facilitate efforts to disrupt or sabotage electronic commerce, air traffic control or even sensitive surveillance systems," the institute said.
"Computer systems are the backbone to U.S. national security," said ADTI Chairman Gregory Fossedal. "Before the Pentagon and other federal agencies make uninformed decisions to alter the very foundation of computer security, they should study the potential consequences carefully."
Okay... But you can freely download open source off the net without signing some stupid license agreement and probably in the case of Microsoft, forking over a chunk of change. Thus, more people look at Open source code than Microsoft code. Have a nice day yourself.
There are people out there who believe that Microsoft security will save their asses. That's a friggin huge check to write..."
On one hand, I agree with your assertion that the chances of this happening is remote due to their lack of sophistication in using technology. But on the other hand, let's not forget that some Muslims like bin Laden are men of means. In other words, what's preventing him from hiring European hackers who are anti-American and paying them untold amounts of money?
Money talks; BS runs a marathon.
Based on various security notices, that seems to be a widespread problem, regardless of source type.
How so? Just because an accusation is made before the paper is published doesn't make it slanderous. Sure, it might turn out that way, but who's to know? As I said before, AdTI seems to have a certain mindset, when it comes to the papers they present.
No, bob. Wrong. If you want to state your opinion, fine. But if you want to assert that opinion as fact, uh uh. No way. Nonsense. Evidence is based on fact. If you don't have evidence, don't bother unless you want to be labeled an idiot.
What are you getting at? Notice the wording in my original post, there is a careful use of 'seem' in my statement. Are you looking for things in my post that aren't there?
But asserting one as "superior" is a religious issue.
That's why it'll be interesting to see where the paper goes.
True, the Xing key was unencrypted, but the other 169 had to be broken (although I'm sure that was a great deal easier, after first one was known).
Very true, but their whole take about how Open Source will hurt the IT industry reminds me of Chicken Little. They spend almost the entire paper on one type of license and brush the prospect of alternative licensing away in a single paragraph. A more proper title would have been: "Opening the Open Source Debate - A Critique of the GPL License"
Here's another take on the paper, which points out some inaccuracies and misunderstandings in the AdTI paper.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.